acdii

The difference is a Lithium fire burns hot and fast, where a normal car fire takes it's time to spread. They are also difficult to put out, water can make them explode. Thats what makes it newsworthy. Puncture the cell cavity, and kiss that car goodbye. A large portion of the weight for cell packs is not the battery, but the enclosure to prevent damage. A shorted cell, depending on it's charge can puff in seconds, and burst, at which point, get the hell out of the way because it will cause a chain reaction and ignite other cells. Any water gets around them and they release hydrogen gas which can cause an explosion and spread hot lithium metal.


It's all good until that happens. Would much rather have a gas or diesel powered vehicle than one with the amount of energy required to move 3 tons. Then again, how many here has experienced what happens when a nearly full 8000Mah 3 cell pack goes up? From crash to ignition was less than 5 seconds, from ignition to total destruction was 45 seconds. In about a minute a $900 plane was turned to ash.

Until battery technology becomes crash proof, I would much rather not see something as big as a pickup running with them. Just look at that car Richard Hammond crashed, he barely made it out alive, a few more seconds and there would have been an obit instead of an episode.

Napalm

those gasoline fires (oh and do the miles calculation on that too) can be put down with normal fire extinguishing methods. Including the basic co2 or dry chemical fire extinguisher you can buy. LIthium battery fires cannot and when they do catch they are self fueling too. Again seriously look into the Boeing 787 battery fires.

The reason tesla puts a water based coolant in the middle of their battery pack is for safety - one of the only proven ways to control a Lithium battery fire is with some version of aqueous foam or other inerting chemical that stops the battery reaction slowing down the heat creation. (it's not necessarily an OPEN FLAME type of fire)

regardless - they can be made safer and yes Tesla and GM have mostly lead the way in making that true.

acdii

Class D extinguishers are what are needed to put them out. Once out, they need to be sealed to prevent air from reaching what wasn't burned out. It's the moisture in the air that ignites them. I think it is great that there is battery technology now that can take a fast charge and deliver high output, but look at it from both sides. Remember when the Volt first came out and it was either IIHS or NTSB(government testing) that did the crash test and the car caught fire while sitting in the lot afterwards, not once, but twice. That car Hammond crashed I believe reignited twice afterwards. Lithium is some nasty stuff, not toxic, but highly flammable.

tvsjr

Wanna know how many Class D extinguishers my fire apparatus carries? Or any of the surrounding departments? Or any major department I know of? Short of HAZMAT, zero.

Tesla actually says to use water:
https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/...e_Guide_en.pdf
Refer to page 23.

3,000 gallons of water to adequately cool a battery. My rescue carries 700 gallons, which has never failed to extinguish an average passenger vehicle fire. With CAFS, I can do it in 200-300gal. A typical urban fire engine will carry 500 (they expect to be hooked up to a hydrant quickly). Even in my rural world, it would take an engine (1,000gal) and a tender (2,000gal) to meet their requirements... and that doesn't address the remainder of the vehicle.

Based on Tesla's recommendations, I need to keep people on scene and prepared to fight fire for however long extinguishment takes, plus one hour after any smoke/fire is seen. I can assure you we don't spend more than an hour on the scene of an average car fire.

They may be less likely to burn, but when they do, they're a rapid-burning mess. I don't want one at this point.

mobandit

Here you go:
https://fox4kc.com/2018/09/17/70-job...lugin-hybrids/

LoneWolfTrucker

Dear Ford, please sell me a unicorn. Thanks in advance.